public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65
@ 2014-05-20 6:00 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
2014-05-20 6:41 ` [Bug middle-end/61243] " ubizjak at gmail dot com
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch @ 2014-05-20 6:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243
Bug ID: 61243
Summary: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region
crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
Recent regression in the one day between good: r210596 bad: r210629
Unfortunately, only happens with -fprofile-use on our large application (CP2K).
Any suggestion on how to get this into a testcase ? I can provide unreduced .F,
.mod and .gcda files.
/data/vjoost/gnu/cp2k/cp2k/makefiles/../src/qs_integrate_potential_low.F:526:0:
error: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65
END SUBROUTINE xyz_to_vab
^
/data/vjoost/gnu/cp2k/cp2k/makefiles/../src/qs_integrate_potential_low.F:526:0:
internal compiler error: verify_flow_info failed
0x6edead verify_flow_info()
../../gcc/gcc/cfghooks.c:260
0xf60a88 try_optimize_cfg
../../gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c:2860
0xf60a88 cleanup_cfg(int)
../../gcc/gcc/cfgcleanup.c:3025
0xf5363b execute
../../gcc/gcc/bb-reorder.c:2353
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
make[2]: *** [qs_integrate_potential_low.o] Error 1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug middle-end/61243] [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 2014-05-20 6:00 [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch @ 2014-05-20 6:41 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com 2014-05-20 16:41 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: ubizjak at gmail dot com @ 2014-05-20 6:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243 Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> --- The same failure is triggered with profiledbootstrap build. First recorded bootstrap failure is at r210603 [1]. Last good bootstrap is at r210599 [2]. It looks that r210603 is problematic [3]. Author CC'd. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-regression/2014-05/msg00224.html [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2014-05/msg01581.html [3] https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2014-05/msg00646.html >From gcc-bugs-return-451990-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue May 20 06:41:55 2014 Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-451990-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org> Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 21122 invoked by alias); 20 May 2014 06:41:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org> List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/> List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org> Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 21070 invoked by uid 48); 20 May 2014 06:41:52 -0000 From: "ubizjak at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug middle-end/61243] [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 06:41:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: middle-end X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.10.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ubizjak at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.10.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on target_milestone everconfirmed Message-ID: <bug-61243-4-gcZMPpcOv7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-61243-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-61243-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg01682.txt.bz2 Content-length: 540 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243 Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2014-05-20 Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com> --- Confirmed. >From gcc-bugs-return-451991-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue May 20 06:59:24 2014 Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-451991-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org> Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3973 invoked by alias); 20 May 2014 06:59:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org> List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/> List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org> Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 3919 invoked by uid 48); 20 May 2014 06:59:19 -0000 From: "muks at banu dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/61236] GCC 4.9 generates incorrect object code Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 06:59:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: muks at banu dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: <bug-61236-4-NFey4C5hlR@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-61236-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-61236-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg01683.txt.bz2 Content-length: 2183 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?ida236 --- Comment #9 from Mukund Sivaraman <muks at banu dot com> --- Hi Jakub, Markus We discussed this during our daily standup call today, and there are two points we'd like to make: 1. The qsort() defintion in C99 doesn't explicitly state that base must not be NULL, though it seems you are deducing that from "the initial element of which is pointed to by base." The POSIX definition of qsort() adds this: "If the nel argument has the value zero, the comparison function pointed to by compar shall not be called and no rearrangement shall take place." 2. From our perpective as users of GCC, this kind of agressive optimization seems counter-intuitive. We'd like code to compile to correct object code first before performance. When the compiler knows at that point that base (=x) is NULL as an argument to qsort(), why isn't it warning when the attribute expects it to be non-NULL, esp. as it is using this inferred decision to optimize code down below? The compiler knows x is NULL at this point in this codepath regardless of what qsort()'s attributes say. Why is it using the attribute then? qsort() also does not assert (at runtime) that base is non-NULL. There is no way to detect this for code which used to run correctly before, but doesn't anymore (without it _hopefully_ crashing somewhere). Other similar functions such as memcpy(), etc. also have this annotation in glibc, whereas there is no definition of n=0 case in C99. This example of qsort() is in libc, but imagine a case where a program uses a 3rd party system installed utility shared library. If the library, in a new version, adds a nonnull annotation for a function, but the library function itself continues to work for NULL input, see what happens to the program: The library is not affected, but the pointer in the calling program is affected if the compiler infers that the pointer is non-NULL due to the attribute. The calling program is now buggy due to a change in the library. How do we discover it? It makes sense to just avoid the qsort() in our case and we will update our code to do so, but please consider the arguments above. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/61243] [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 2014-05-20 6:00 [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2014-05-20 6:41 ` [Bug middle-end/61243] " ubizjak at gmail dot com @ 2014-05-20 16:41 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-20 21:25 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-05-20 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Hmm, looks like we have two groups of routines for copying insns and I missed one of them. Testing a patch. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/61243] [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 2014-05-20 6:00 [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2014-05-20 6:41 ` [Bug middle-end/61243] " ubizjak at gmail dot com 2014-05-20 16:41 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-05-20 21:25 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-20 21:28 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-21 5:34 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-05-20 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243 --- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Author: rsandifo Date: Tue May 20 21:24:37 2014 New Revision: 210658 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210658&root=gcc&view=rev Log: gcc/ PR rtl-optimization/61243 * emit-rtl.c (emit_copy_of_insn_after): Copy CROSSING_JUMP_P. Modified: trunk/gcc/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/emit-rtl.c ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/61243] [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 2014-05-20 6:00 [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2014-05-20 21:25 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-05-20 21:28 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-21 5:34 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-05-20 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243 rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |WAITING --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org <rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The patch I committed fixes the profiledbootstrap failure. Please could you retry your original testcase to see whether that's fixed too? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug middle-end/61243] [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 2014-05-20 6:00 [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2014-05-20 21:28 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-05-21 5:34 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch @ 2014-05-21 5:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61243 Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC| |Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz | |.ch Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele <Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch> --- yes, fixed, thanks! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-05-21 5:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-05-20 6:00 [Bug middle-end/61243] New: [4.10 Regression] verify_flow_info failed: No region crossing jump at section boundary in bb 65 Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2014-05-20 6:41 ` [Bug middle-end/61243] " ubizjak at gmail dot com 2014-05-20 16:41 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-20 21:25 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-20 21:28 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-05-21 5:34 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).